Patriarchal Order

(Note: these are mostly my raw notes from a class I attended at BYU Education Week. I haven’t included much of my own insights and feelings, so feel free to chime in with some of your own observations, and quotes, etc from other sources I haven’t mentioned)

(EDIT 1/20/2013: A fellow blogger, Heather @ Women in the Scriptures recently posted an excellent piece about what it means to "preside" which I think goes hand in hand with the ideas in this post, and would be an excellent read if you are looking for more of what that means: find the post here

The priesthood structure in the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is patriarchal. That is exactly what it is, and it is designed to be that way by God. But what that means is sometimes confusing, and leads a lot of men (and women) to think that men are somehow superior to, more important than, or the “ruler” of some kind – basically that men should lead and women should follow. This understanding is an inaccurate understanding of what patriarchal order means in the Church.

Last summer I attended BYU Education Week and attended a class about the patriarchal order and leadership in marriage. I haven’t typed up my notes for the blog yet, and I figured I should since I learned a lot of good things.

The instructor talked about three doctrines involved in the understanding of patriarchal order. We talked a little bit about other doctrines that have to be taken together to get the whole picture – for example, grace and works, justice and mercy, etc. If you look at only one of the doctrines, then you miss the picture and you get an incomplete understand of the full doctrine.

In order to understand the patriarchal order in the Church, we have to look at three doctrines:

1.) Men Preside
2.) Men and Women are Absolute Equals
3.) Gospel Leadership Means Service

Men Preside

The first doctrine, “Men Preside” at first sounds like men are in some way above women. The Merriam-Webster definition of preside states “to exercise guidance, direction, or control.” I think the first two are the most suitable in this situation – that a father presides to exercise guidance and direction, not necessarily control. The definition also includes “to occupy the place of authority.”

Elder Deal L. Larsen said, “In the Lord’s system of government, every organization unit must have a presiding officer. He has decreed that in the family organization the father assumes this role. He bears the priesthood ordination. He is accountable before the Lord for this leadership.”

Our instructor also mentioned that the patriarchal order has its divine spirit and purpose. We may not know exactly what that is in this life. We may know ever really know why men preside and not women, but we know that’s the way the Lord has instructed us to do it, and I do not think that it takes something away from women to not preside. I think it’s more about order.

Some responsibilities associated with presiding are
- lead with love, gentleness, and kindness
- preside at family prayer, family meals, and family home evening
- teach correct principles
- give father’s blessings
- conduct father’s interviews
- participate in children’s discipline
- sacrifice for the well being of the family
- set a good example
- live a family centered life

I don’t see anything in this list that would suggest that a man is “above” a woman in presiding. It is simply the order of things. And just because something is in this list does not mean that women cannot also do it. Even presiding at family prayer, family meals, and family home evening – at times a mother may preside in these instances.

Presiding implies taking initiative. The husband, in presiding, initiates gospel living in the home. He should not be the one dragged along by his wife or children.

Satan takes a lot of divine things and twists them around. He takes things that are sacred and beautiful and makes them profane and obscene. He has done the same thing with the patriarchal order and convinced men (and women) that since a man presides over his family that somehow means that he is more important than his wife, or he has the final say, or his wife’s input is not as important.

If we look only at the doctrine that men preside, our doctrine certainly appears chauvinistic and oppressive. We can’t stop here, we have to look at the other very important doctrines.

Men and Women are Absolute Equals

The second doctrine in the patriarchal order is “Men and Women are Absolute Equals”.

Elder L. Tom Perry said,

Remember, brethren, that in your role as leader in the family, your wife is your companion. As President Gordon B. Hinckley has taught: “In this Church the man neither walks ahead of his wife nor behind his wife but at her side. They are coequals.”  Since the beginning, God has instructed mankind that marriage should unite husband and wife together in unity. Therefore, there is not a president or a vice president in a family. The couple works together eternally for the good of the family. They are united together in word, in deed, and in action as they lead, guide, and direct their family unit. They are on equal footing. They plan and organize the affairs of the family jointly and unanimously as they move forward.

While the husband may preside spiritually over the family (which really just means that he has a responsibility to guide and direct his family – basically show his family how to live the gospel and how to return to Heavenly Father), the wife stands by his side at the head of the family. She is not like the husband’s child. She is to stand with him, united “as they lead, guide, and direct their family unit.”

We talked about a few different kinds of “leaders” in a family.

The Dictator – there are actually two different types of dictators. There is a tyrant, who terrorizes his wife into doing what he wants her to do. “You will do this.” And then there is what our teacher called the “benevolent dictator”. This is the man who comes to his wife when it is time to make a decision on something, such as buying a new car, and says “Honey, what kind of car do you think we should buy?”, listens politely, and then goes out and buys whatever he wants to buy.

Reluctant Leader – this is the man who doesn’t really want to lead a family. He would rather let his wife take care of everything while he goes out to play (or stays in to play, as the case may be). The wife has to step up and lead the family because her husband won’t.

Figurehead – this is the leader who gets pushed out of the way by her wife. He appears to be the leader in the family, but the wife takes everything over without even consulting him (this, I might add, would be when the wife is the dictator). This man may want to be the leader in the home, and when questioned the wife may actually say he is the leader, but in reality she does it all. A lot of times this comes because the wife has an attitude of “I can do it better than you” rather than letting the husband lead the way he knows how, and encouraging him. In Father, Consider Your Ways, the twelve apostles counseled husbands (and wives) that fatherhood and the associated leadership “is not a matter of whether you are most worthy or best qualified, but it is a matter of law and [divine] appointment.” I think a lot of women might do well to remember that. It’s not about our husband’s being the best at being a husband or father, it’s about them being called. Just like it’s not about the Relief Society President being the best for the job – it’s about the Bishop having called her to be the president, and us sustaining her in that calling.

But none of these types of leaders are in harmony with gospel doctrine. The doctrine says that we should be equal partners. So what does that look like?

Equal Partners – both partners have veto power. Decisions are unanimous. If husband and wife don’t both agree, then the issue is tabled until they can agree. Honestly this is hard because sometimes it means that nothing gets done. Look at the United States Congress – and they don’t even have to have a unanimous vote! But that doesn’t change the fact that in order to be equal partners you must both agree. And sometimes that involved compromise (which is not a bad thing). Marion G. Romney reminded us that “Neither [husband nor wife] should plan or follow an independent course of action. They should consult, pray, and decide together.”

Another example our instructor used was that of two signatures on a check. Every decision requires two signatures – the husband’s, and the wife’s. He also mentioned that this is how the quorum of the twelve apostles works – all decisions have to be unanimous before the decision is official.

Gospel Leadership Means Service

The third doctrine we have to consider is that “Gospel Leadership Means Service”. “But he that is greatest among you shall be your servant.” Christ presides over His Church this way – as our servant. Elder Neal A. Maxwell taught us that we should be a “leader-servant”. The question a gospel leader should ask is “How can I help?” rather than “How can I help myself?” The father, as the leader of the family, is this “leader-servant”.

It’s almost important to remember that the presiding done by a father in the home is a spiritual leadership, rather than a governmental or political leadership. That is what Elder Perry meant when he said there is no “president” in the family. There is a man who is a spiritual leader, which means he is a “leader-servant”.

Joseph F. Smith taught men how to treat their wives, “Parents … should love and respect each other, and treat each other with respectful decorum and kindly regard, all the time. The husband should treat his wife with the utmost courtesy and respect. The husband should never insult her; he should never speak slightly of her, but should always hold her in the highest esteem in the home, in the presence of their children.”

President Boyd K. Packer also taught men about serving their wives and children.

It was not meant that the woman alone accommodate herself to the priesthood duties of her husband or her sons. She is of course to sustain and support and encourage them.

Holders of the priesthood, in turn, must accommodate themselves to the needs and responsibilities of the wife and mother. Her physical and emotional and intellectual and cultural well-being and her spiritual development must stand first among his priesthood duties.

There is no task, however menial, connected with the care of babies, the nurturing of children, or with the maintenance of the home that is not his equal obligation. The tasks which come with parenthood, which many consider to be below other tasks, are simply above them.

Those outside the Church think that ordination to the Priesthood means “power” in the worldly sense. The true meaning of the Priesthood in the Church means service and protection. President David O. McKay described Priesthood power like the power of a reservoir of water,

We can conceive of the power of the priesthood as being potentially existent as an impounded reservoir of water. Such power becomes dynamic and productive of good only when the liberated force becomes active in valleys, fields, gardens, and happy homes. So the priesthood, as related to humanity, is a principle of power only as it becomes active in the lives of men, turning their hearts and desires toward God and prompting service to their fellowmen.

…I say that because the priesthood you hold means that you are to serve others.

The Priesthood has no power until it is used to serve others.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

How have you seen the principle of patriarchal leadership twisted by Satan? What blessings come to families when patriarchal leadership is practiced correctly, when husbands and father are servant-leaders and equal partners with their wives? Do you feel like patriarchal leadership is practiced correctly in your home? In your ward?

Separating Culture from Doctrine: The Lesson Handout

This is the first post in a new series called “Separating Culture from Doctrine”, where we talk about places where culture has been mistaken as doctrine among the members of the Church. I wanted to start with the dress code myth, but I decided to let that issue cool off a bit before I tackled it again. So I’m starting with something a little less controversial (I hope!) and somewhat lighthearted, but I would like to eventually tackle some things that are harder to separate. Do you know of a part of Mormon culture that many members of the Church mistake as doctrine? Have you heard of something in the Church that people make out to be doctrinal, and you’re not sure if it is? Let me know in the comments, or drop me an email or a post on Facebook (see “Subscribe and Connect” on the sidebar for links) and I will do the research and find out how much is doctrine, and how much is culture.

When I was in the Young Women program (the Church’s youth program for 12-18 year old girls) I kept a binder with a bunch of pages inside of sheet protectors. Whenever I would get a handout in Young Women or Sunday School I would glue it to one of the pages in this binder. I kept the for years, but I never used it, and eventually I scanned all the pages into my computer (which I haven’t look at since – until today when I was writing this post and wanted to include a picture of one of the pages).

Obviously those handouts had a huge impact on my life. Or not.

In fact, I don’t even remember the lessons they went to (not specifically). The lessons did make an impact in my life, and in the building of my testimony, but I don’t associate the handouts with those lessons. In fact, I remember every one of my YW and Sunday School teachers from my time as a youth, but I couldn’t tell you what any of them taught me. What I could tell you is that each one of them was an amazing example to me and the fire of their testimonies lit a fire in me.

They didn’t need the handouts to do that.

And neither do you.

Mormon Myth #1 – Handouts are an integral, and even necessary, part of a lesson. They help the class members remember the lesson, and are part of your calling as a teacher.

Truth: Preparing handouts can take precious time away from study and prayer that is an integral and necessary part of a lesson. The Holy Ghost teaches class members, and the Holy Ghost helps class members remember the lesson – not you, and not your handouts. As a teacher your focus should be on prayerfully studying the lesson material and listening for inspiration to know what questions will elicit the most beneficial discussion for your class members.

Our Church Web site now provides access to all of the general conference addresses and other contents of Church magazines for the past 30 years. Teachers can download bales of information on any subject. When highly focused, a handout can enrich. But a bale of handouts can detract from our attempt to teach gospel principles with clarity and testimony. Stacks of supplementary material can impoverish rather than enrich, because they can blur students’ focus on the assigned principles and draw them away from prayerfully seeking to apply those principles in their own lives. (Elder Dallin H. Oaks, Focus and Priorities, April 2001 General Conference)

I hear women say that their callings are wearing them out or that they don’t have time to serve. But magnifying our callings does not mean staying up all night preparing handouts and elaborate table decorations. It does not mean that each time we do our visiting teaching we have to take something to our sisters. Sometimes we are our own worst enemies. Let’s simplify. The message of a good lesson comes through spiritual preparation. Let’s put our focus on the principles of the gospel and on the material in our study guides. Let’s prepare to create an interesting exchange of ideas through discussion, not through extra, invented work that makes us so weary we come to resent the time we spend in fulfilling our callings. (Sister Kathleen H. Hughes, Out of Small Things, October 2004 General Conference)

Dedicating some of our time to studying the scriptures or preparing to teach a lesson is a good sacrifice. Spending many hours stitching the title of the lesson into homemade pot holders for each member of your class perhaps may not be. (President Dieter F. Uchtdorf, Forget Me Not, 2011 General Relief Society Broadcast)

Mother was a great teacher who was diligent and thorough in her preparation. I have distinct memories of the days preceding her lessons. The dining room table would be covered with reference materials and the notes she was preparing for her lesson. There was so much material prepared that I’m sure only a small portion of it was ever used during the class, but I’m just as sure that none of her preparation was ever wasted. …What she didn’t use in her class she used to teach her children. (Elder L. Tom Perry, Mothers Teaching Children in the Home, April 2010 General Conference)

I’m sure no one’s soul was damaged in the preparation of the handouts my teachers made for me in Young Women and Sunday School, and I am not passing judgment on them and neither should you. This isn’t about judging people. It’s about talking about what is culture, and what is doctrine.

The Mormon culture encourages us to spend a little time on the praying and studying part, and then a lot of time on the handout part. This same principle can be applied to Young Women and Relief Society programs that get so involved the spirit is missed, and the only thing people remember are the cute decorations and handouts. They don’t remember the spirit they felt (if they felt the spirit at all) and they don’t remember the lesson taught.

We should be so careful to focus on what really matters.

I want to tell you about our Ward Christmas dinner. The dinner was fantastic, homecooked, gourmet food, and the decorations were intricate and handmade. The cultural hall felt like a winter wonderland. The atmosphere was lovely, the music was touching, and the company was wonderful, as usual. If I didn’t know the sister who was in charge I may have been tempted to think it was a little over done. But I know this sister and I know that she took great pleasure and joy in creating a beautiful environment for us to enjoy a delicious meal. She was very good at it, and I know that she didn’t stress out about it at all. In fact, I bet planning and preparing for that ward party was the most relaxing thing she has done in a while.

I related this story so that you can know that we should not be judgmental of sisters who make elaborate handouts for Relief Society lessons. Nor should we be judgmental of sisters who don’t make elaborate handouts for lessons.

(as a side note – if you give me a non-edible handout in Relief Society I will probably dispose of it in my recycling bin as soon as I get home – I do not like paper, and I despise clutter – handouts, in my opinion, are frequently clutter – and I do not want your little decoration you made for me. It probably doesn’t fit into my décor. These are things to think about as well when you are thinking about preparing a handout. If the handout is edible I will most definitely eat it.)

Let us please keep in mind that the Spirit is the real teacher when we “teach” a class. The handouts are cute, but most of them end up in the trash anyway. Save a tree – use the Spirit.

For more instruction on teaching the gospel, see the Church’s handbook, Teaching, No Greater Call. There are no handouts – just in case you were wondering.

How do you use the Spirit to teach your class? Do you use handouts? Have you ever spent too much time on the handout and not enough time on your lesson? Can you think of ways when a handout might be appropriate?

The Myth of Equality in the Church

I read a great article today from the 2012 FAIR Conference this past weekend (I did not attend, and this was the only article I read). This particular presentation was given by Neylan McBaine, the founder of The Mormon Women Project. I first came across the presentation on a forum I participate in where the presentation was linked to with the following quote:

I don’t think gender tensions in Mormonism are due to inequality in the religion, but due to invisibility of that equality. The equality is embedded, inherent in Mormon theology, history, texts, structures. Gender equality is built into the blueprints of Mormonism, but obscured in the elaborations.

This was actually a quote from Maxine Hanks, a member of the September Six who was excommunicated in the 80s and re-baptized just last year. Ironically, the main argument of the presentation by Neylan McBaine actually supports the idea that there is not gender equality in the Church structure, or even in the doctrine. She says,

[I]n the outside world, when you say men and women have equal leadership opportunities, you mean — at least ideally — that men and women have the same cleared path to advance to the same positions of influence and authority…

Is there gender discrimination in the Church? If discrimination means separation according to gender, yes. If it means delineation of opportunities based solely on gender, yes. Many argue that different opportunities based on gender is unfair, adverse, and/or abusive by definition. The Church does not satisfy secular gender-related egalitarian ideals, period; and our institutional behavior fits that definition of gender discrimination in several inescapable ways. We shrink away from accurately representing how we work, thinking it condemns us as a church. And in the eyes of the world it might. But the Church does not, and should not, operate according to secular concepts of power, status, etc.; and if we attempt to justify ourselves in this paradigm we will not only fail, but betray our own ideals.

McBaine’s argument here seems to be that there is inherently not gender equality in the Church – not in the way the world would like to define it, anyway – and that the Church should not try to pretend it fits into the world’s definition of “equality”. I tend to agree. A few months ago I shared with you a lot of my thoughts about gender and equality, and how the whole argument seems to be a little messed up and misdirected. I couldn’t quite put my finger on what I felt – I had only just recently started thinking seriously about gender roles and equality – and the doctrine we are taught about it. When I read McBaine’s presentation it finally made sense – there is not gender equality in the Church, the way the world defines it, and there shouldn’t be.

In society, the world calls that “separate but equal” – and so far it seems that the Church has tried to go along with that – which gets us into problems, because the last time “separate but equal” was used it ended up before the Supreme Court and eventually in the Senate, where judges and lawmakers in the United States ruled that separate is inherently not equal. Which is true. Separate is not equal. We shouldn’t pretend it is.

Equality Where it Matters

There are fundamental doctrines of equality in the gospel of Jesus Christ. All are invited to come unto Christ, and he denies none.

he inviteth them all to come unto him and partake of his goodness; and he denieth none that come unto him, black and white, bond and free, male and female; and he remembereth the heathen; and all are alike unto God, both Jew and Gentile. (2 Nephi 26:33)

We are all spirit children of our Heavenly Father, and as such have infinite worth.

we are the offspring of God (Acts 17:29)

Remember the worth of souls is great in the sight of God; (D&C 18:10)

The atonement of the Savior was for all men.

For behold, I, God, have suffered these things for all, that they might not suffer if they would repent; (D&C 19:16)

Men and women are to work together as equal partners

In these sacred responsibilities, [men and women] are obligated to help one another as equal partners. (The Family: A Proclamation to the World)

It’s clear to see that there are definitely facets of equality in the gospel of Jesus Christ – and in my opinion, they occur where the equality needs to be. Women are not more valuable than men, neither are men more valuable than women. This doctrine is clearly illustrated in the highest ordinance possible in the gospel of Jesus Christ – the sealing ordinance. This ordinance can only be obtained by a man and a woman together. No woman can obtain exaltation alone, and no man can obtain it alone. We are “all alike unto God”.

Embracing ‘Inequality’

But what about the inequality? It certainly exists. Men are ordained to offices in the priesthood, and preside over the Church, and women preside over organizations in the Church, but will never preside over the Church itself. One interesting note to make (that doesn’t make it less unequal, but is important to understand that the equality of gender importance extends to these types of inequality) is that a man who is not married will never be ordained to the highest priesthood offices. Any man who serves in an authority position in the Church is married to a woman.

McBaine discussed a Washington Post article in which Michael Otterson, the Public Affairs director for the Church, had a hard time getting across what equality really looks like in the Church (which is to say, equality in the Church really looks like inequality). She said,

The prompt suggests women do not hold leadership positions, therefore women are inferior. I suggest we argue it is true that Mormon women do not hold an equal number of global leadership positions as men, but that is not because they are of lesser value. It is because we believe we are working in an eternal paradigm in which roles and responsibilities are divided up cooperatively rather than hierarchically. Mormonism is a lay church so the members are the ministers, and this is a completely different organizational structure than traditional Christian priesthood or ministry, which is defined as an exclusive or trained clergy…

The prompt’s logic doesn’t adequately leave room for our organization’s cooperative structure of service, where no one person is paid for his or her ministry or deemed of greater value than another and where each brings unique resources to his or her responsibilities…

[I]n a cooperative structure where people are rotating positions every few years and no one is materialistically rewarded over another person, that hierarchy is a flimsy currency on which to base one’s value.

Nowhere does the Lord intimate that various callings and responsibilities are intended to give one person power over another. In fact, the words “lead” and “leader” appear nowhere in this section, and similarly, the word “leader” appears no where in the Book of Mormon. Even that book’s most admirable leaders, like Captain Moroni, are described as “servant[s]” and “righteous follower[s] of Christ.” This emphasis on organizational stability, on the specific roles and responsibilities of various parties to act as facilitators within the larger community, is, we believe, of divine origin and eternal value.

Lastly, the world calculates in terms of top-down power; God’s calculations are exactly opposite. In the divine kingdom the servant holds the highest status, and in the Church every position is a service position. Given the obvious parallels between the Church’s administrative channels and a business organization, it’s easy to mistakenly assess the Church as a ladder-climbing corporation with God in a corner office at the top; but in this line of thinking we only reveal our shoddy human understanding of power.

I loved this break down of what power and authority really mean in the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. I think that McBaine explained it better than I have ever heard it put – and she was very concise. I feel that her explanation of what she calls a “cooperative paradigm” perfectly illustrates what our prophets and leaders have stressed for centuries – that men and women work as equal partners, that the sisters “provoke the brethren to good works in looking to the wants of the poor” (Joseph Smith in Minutes of Relief Society Meetings), and that presiding officers should ask for and seek out the council of sisters in the ward (here).

What Women Really Do in the Church

In a post I wrote about women the priesthood, I mentioned a BYU Devotional by Sister Julie B. Beck in which she discussed how Relief Societies are basically priesthood quorums for women. The devotional is very good, and I encourage an in depth study of her words to help you understand what it means to be a woman in the Church, and what the Relief Society is really about.

McBaine mentioned this in her presentation. She said,

An appendage is “a thing that is added or attached to something larger or more important.” Are not the offices of elder or bishop or teacher or deacon appendages to the priesthood, and not the priesthood itself? Are these so different from the female organizations, which we routinely call “auxiliaries”?

According to Sister Beck, our Relief Societies, or “auxiliaries” are indeed not very different from the “appendages” that are priesthood quorums. And as women, we need to understand that – and when we do understand that position of the Relief Society we will be able to fully unleash the power that President Kimball promised was available to us when he said, “There is a power in this organization that has not yet been fully exercised… nor will it until both the sisters and [the brethren] catch the vision of Relief Society.”

Embracing the Inequality

McBaine concluded her presentation with suggestions ward leaders could implement (which are in keeping with current policies of the Church) to help women catch that vision. Some of my favorites were having Young Women assigned as companions to Visiting Teachers, as Young Men are assigned as home teaching companions. Or at least encourage adult women to bring Young Women along with them on visiting teaching assignments. Having more visibility of women in ward and stake leadership positions. My personal favorite – addressing Presidents of organizations as such “President Johns” rather than “Sister Johns” for the Relief Society, Young Women, and Primary presidents (and I would add the Quorum presidents in the ward priesthood organization).

And for heaven’s sake, let’s teach our children the real doctrine about the priesthood and prophets. I was shocked at how McBaine seemed surprised to hear that her great-great-grandmother was referred to in her patriarchal blessing as a “prophetess and revelator”.

Can you imagine using such language of empowerment to describe the female leaders in your wards? If we grew accustomed to hearing our women leaders speak as authorities, as prophetesses and revelators, and referred to them that way ourselves, perhaps there would be fewer among us who feel the need for a soda or bathroom break when the female speaker comes on the screen during General Conference.

Why, yes I can, Sister McBaine. I have thought of my mother (and myself, and my aunts and my cousins, and the Relief Society and Young Women’s presidencies) as prophetesses since I knew what a prophet really was. It’s probably the reason why I don’t have a problem with men being ordained to priesthood offices. I’m sure it has something to do with the reason why I have always enjoyed hearing the General Young Women’s, Primary, and Relief Society presidencies speak. And I know it’s the reason why I am so confident that there is nothing in this gospel that I can’t have and a man can. The only things I can’t get on my own are things that a man can’t get on his own either.

Have you ever tried to “explain away” the inequality in the Church? How do you feel about embracing it? Do you believe that, in the ways of the world, there truly is an inherent inequality between men and women in the gospel of Jesus Christ? Is it really inequality in God’s plan? Do we need to abolish all differences between men and women in order to truly be “equal”?

GCBC Week 13: The Why of Priesthood Service

It has been a long week around here – pretty much everyone in our house has strep. Antibiotics all around! Woohoo! I was looking forward to Sunday and then I remembered that with all the strep around our house I probably shouldn’t send my kids to Primary/nursery. We had to go to Church for sacrament meeting because we had choir practice before Church and the Elders’ Quorum sang a special musical number in the meeting, which I had to conduct (it was amazing, by the way). We shouldn’t be contagious anymore (we’ve been on antibiotics for a few days) but just in case, I figured it’s better to be safe than sorry, right?

President Ucthdorf’s talk from Sunday morning session of General Conference was so amazing that I got kind of excited when I saw that today’s talk was his talk from Priesthood session. Who else is excited?

Well, let’s do this, then.

The Why of Priesthood Service by President Dieter F. Uchtdorf

We need to be constantly reminded of the eternal reasons behind the things we are commanded to do. The basic gospel principles need to be part of our life’s fabric, even if it means learning them over and over again. That doesn’t mean that this process should be rote or boring. Rather, when we teach the foundational principles in our homes or in church, let the flame of enthusiasm for the gospel and the fire of testimony bring light, warmth, and joy to the hearts of those we teach.

…

The what is important in our work, and we need to attend to it. But it is in the why of priesthood service that we discover the fire, passion, and power of the priesthood.

I really really liked this talk from President Uchtdorf. I have mentioned the “Mission-Motherhood” parallel before, and I think there is also a Relief Society/Priesthood Quroum parallel. In fact, I don’t just think there is, there is. (Sister Beck said so!) Any talk that is delivered to the brethren in the priesthood quorums is equally applicable to the sisters in Relief Society, and the same is true the other way around – any talk delivered to the sisters of the Relief Societies is equally applicable to the brethren who hold the priesthood.

Now, obviously there are some exceptions, but as I read this talk my testimony was strengthened that women have priesthood duties and responsibilities, and as members of Relief Societies we are equally accountable for the work of “the priesthood”. We are equal partners in the work of the Lord. This is one reason I love reading and listening to the talks from the Priesthood session. At first I thought it was so that I can support my husband and teach my son(s), but now I realize that it is because the lessons taught are equally applicable to me!

I really loved all the principles of understanding purpose in this talk.

Like a fruit tree with an abundance of branches and leaves, our lives need regular pruning to ensure that we use our energy and time to accomplish our real purpose—to “bring forth good fruit”!

This was my absolute favorite quote from President Uchtdorf’s talk. I couldn’t help making a printable of it. How often have I needed this advice in my own life. His counsel was so appropriate for our day of “do everything” mentalities. I struggle with this attitude myself.

What stood out to you in President Uchtdorf’s talk?

Girly Men and Manly Girls

I have a three year old little girl who absolutely loves the color pink. I am sure we influenced that in some way because we buy her a lot of pink clothes. We don’t do it on purpose, I think it has more to do with what’s available than with what we would prefer for her to wear. I don’t think we have a preference for what color she wears.

I also have a five year old little boy who up until a few weeks ago refused to use the pink plates, cups, and bowls because “Pink is a girl color.”

Now, I don’t think those words have ever come out of my mouth, and I definitely do not feel that way. I am pretty sure he came to that conclusion on his own. He is very aware that there is a significant and inherent difference between girls and boys, and he knows that his little sister is very much a girl (a fact she, at three years old, is also acutely aware of). I think he just put two and two together – J wears pink, J is a girl, therefore pink must be a girl color.

Every time he says “Pink is a girl color.” We say, “Pink is a great color. Boys can use pink things. Boys can even wear pink clothes!” or something of the sort.

I think it has started paying off. A few weeks ago my son picked a pink cup out of the drawer for his drink and proudly proclaimed, “I’m going to pick the pink cup!” It was as if he had realized how silly he was being for refusing to use pink dishes and was pleased with himself for being man enough to pick the pink cup. He also has a best (boy) friend whose favorite colors are pink and purple, and I think the exposure to his friend has helped, too.

On Sunday night my husband and I were having a great conversation about various topics, including gender roles and homosexuality. We were talking about the stereotype that men who like “girl things” must be gay. There is a term I have been hearing a lot lately -

ef·fem·i·nate    /iˈfemənit/

Adjective:   derogatory. (of a man) Having or showing characteristics regarded as typical of a woman; unmanly.

I am glad that this definition points out that it is a derogatory term. But I have seen people use it who were simply using it to describe how they are (in a non derogatory way). In fact, most recently was in a post by Josh Weed, a gay Mormon who is married to a woman and came out on his blog a few days ago. He said (emphasis is mine)

*Why did a girl ask me that question in junior high? Because a bully actively spread a rumor around the entire school that I was a “woman trapped in a man’s body.” This was unbelievably horrific and traumatizing, and I was harassed every single day about it, often by perfect strangers. I was more effeminate, played the violin, didn’t play sports, was never interested in girls and didn’t hang out with guys, and so people glommed onto that rumor and ruthlessly harassed me for the entire year, culminating in a yearbook filled with breathtakingly insensitive taunts. Being the gay kid is really, really hard in junior high. If you know a gay kid in junior high, give them a hug and tell them you love them. I assure you they could use it.

I was startled when I read that he described himself as effeminate, because he was LDS, and the gospel doesn’t really support the stereotypical gender roles of the world. The gospel, in fact, encourages all men to be “effeminate” – submissive, meek, humble, patient, full of love, etc. (Please note that I am fully aware of the fact that there is a difference between the gospel and the Church, and there is an even bigger difference between the gospel of Jesus Christ and Church culture).

The Wikipedia article for “Effeminacy” states

Effeminacy describes traits in a human male, that are more often associated with traditional feminine nature, behavior, mannerisms, style or gender roles rather than masculine nature, behavior, mannerisms, style or roles.

It is a term frequently applied to womanly behavior, demeanor, style and appearance displayed by a male, typically used implying criticism or ridicule of this behavior (as opposed to, for example, merely describing a male as feminine, which is non-judgmental). The term effeminate is most often used by people who subscribe to the conventional view that males should conform to traditional masculine traits and behaviors.

I acknowledge that this term can be used non-derogatorily and that it gets the point across when you are describing a man who, by the world’s standards, does “girly” things or is “girly”. But, notice that the article also mentions that “merely describing a male as feminine … is non-judgmental”. I think that both descriptions of men are judgmental and offensive.

I think that the world’s (and members of the Church’s) gender stereotypes are hogwash. Malarkey.

In a previous post about gender I mentioned that the Church’s Parent’s Guide is a great resource to help us understand that our divine gender identity is not founded on the world’s stereotypes of what men and women should act like.

There are many patterns of behavior that are appropriate for all people. Everyone, male and female, is invited to examine the character of Jesus Christ and emulate him … Among the traits Christ revealed as proper for men and women alike are faith, hope, charity, virtue, knowledge, temperance, patience, kindness, godliness, humility, diligence, and love. These virtues transcend gender. They are Christlike attributes to which both sexes should aspire … Spiritual gifts, as described in Doctrine and Covenants 46, are not restricted to one gender either. Included are gifts of knowledge, belief, administration, organization, healing, and discernment.

You should provide opportunities for your children to develop talents in various directions unhindered by improper stereotypes … Teach your daughters and your sons to seek opportunities to learn and to exploit every such opportunity fully … Boys must learn basic domestic skills, and girls must be able to earn a living if necessary. (emphasis mine)

We should be and should raise our children to be unhindered by improper stereotypes. I believe these improper stereotypes are a way that Satan confuses us about our divine gender identity. Either he tells us that “gender doesn’t matter” and we can “choose” our gender identity, or, using the stereotypes, Satan would have us believe that if a man “acts like a girl” or a girl “acts like a man” they must be homosexual, or they must not really be a man or a woman – as if how a person acts somehow changes who they actually are. Even someone who lives contrary to the commandments of God can never change the fact that they are, indeed, a child of God.

As parents I think that we have a very significant role in shaping our children’s perspective of what it means to be a man or what it means to be a woman. I am still figuring out exactly what it means to be a woman, but I can tell you that I know what being a man/being a woman doesn’t mean.

Being a man does not mean being able to change a tire, having huge muscles, being able to bench your weight (or more than it). It does not mean being able to “take someone” in a fight. It definitely does not mean “controlling your woman” or being “in charge” at your house and in your family in an unrighteous-dominion kind of way. It absolutely does not mean loving football (or any sport for that matter), or not ever crying, or being able to “take it” (physical OR emotional pain). It in no way means that you have to ignore your children, that you can never sing a lullaby, or kiss a boo-boo. It does not mean that you cannot be in a play, do ballet, play the flute, or paint.

Being a woman does not mean that you are tender hearted and sweet. It does not mean that you adore children and babies. It doesn’t mean that you like the color pink or purple or some variation of the two. It definitely doesn’t mean that you like scrapbooking, or that you like to cook, or clean, or blog. It absolutely does not mean that you “submit” to every thing your husband ever wants you to do. It in no way means that you can’t like monster truck rallies, the rodeo, or fixing cars. It does not mean that you keep out of the wood shop and stay in the kitchen. It in no way means that you can’t play the tuba or the double bass or sing tenor. It doesn’t mean you have to wear makeup or a dress or never have a job or not get an education. There is nothing about being a woman that says you can’t clean 200 lbs or bench more than your own weight. Being a woman does not mean that you cry over every sad movie or love story. It doesn’t even mean you like love stories.

Manhood and womanhood are not defined in these ways. Right now I can’t tell you exactly what defines manhood and womanhood, but I am absolutely certain that it isn’t those things.

All of the things I mentioned are characteristics, personality traits, and hobbies that are not gender specific, no matter how badly the world wants to claim they are. There is nothing innately feminine about being meek and submissive or crying. There is nothing innately manly about being strong and charismatic or fighting. Nor do those things make you a man or a woman. In fact, except in very rare and extreme circumstances, the only thing that really does make you a man or woman is the second chromosome in your body.

There are Christ-like characteristics and there are non-Christ-like characteristics. We should all, men and women, be seeking to develop Christ-like qualities. We should not make men feel like “less of a man” because they are developing those qualities, or make women feel less womanly because they don’t innately have Christ-like qualities.

What improper gender stereotypes do you see around you? Were improper stereotypes embraced in your family? In your ward? By your friends? What problems do you see developing from gender stereotyping?

Where Did I Come From?

I love science. Especially physics. My best friend and roommate from Brigham Young University was an astrophysics major when we were going through school, and I was studying physics for my minor, so we had a lot of physics classes together. When she got home from her mission and I was just married we attended a lecture about dark matter. The Wikipedia article starts out, “In astronomy and cosmology, dark matter is a currently unknown type of matter hypothesized to account for a large part of the total mass in the universe.” The lecture was fascinating, and the conclusion was, “We still have no clue what dark matter is.” Which is kind of fun in the math and science world, because that means there is more to learn and discover!

As a mathematician and lover of science (I wouldn’t dare call myself a scientist), and a very religious person, I find things like dark matter fascinating. It is not hard for me to reconcile my belief in science with my faith in God. When I come across something that science can’t explain (right now) it is usually a great faith builder for me – partly because I have to have faith that there is an explanation, and partly because when science can’t explain something it humbles me to remember just how little we do know about God and His creations.

Several weeks ago, a friend of mine shared this video with me. It was amazing. As I said, I am a lover of science, but also a lover of the gospel. Many of the topics discussed in this video brought a lot of light and truth to me as I pondered them in relation to things that I have learned about the gospel. I should probably stop being surprised that science makes so much sense. And especially that true science always fits in with the gospel.

I especially love when he says “Quantum mechanics would be intuitive to their toddlers. Whole symphonies would be written by their children…” Yup.

What do you think?

Women and the Priesthood

There seems to be a big conflict about women and the priesthood. A lot of women (and men) seem to think it is the same as the ban on blacks having the priesthood. They are waiting for a revelation that will extend the priesthood to all women, as well as men.

I don’t think this will ever happen. Not because I don’t think women won’t or shouldn’t have the priesthood. I don’t think it will ever happen because women already possess every power of the priesthood, and are not excluded from priesthood service. And because the women are already organized after the pattern of the priesthood, and all we need to do is wake up and fulfill our potential that has already been given us.

Women have Priesthood Power

In a post at By Common Consent a few months ago, the post author pointed out that ordination to a priesthood office does not necessarily mean the priesthood “holder” has any kind of priesthood power.

So if ordination to priesthood office does not give someone priesthood power, then what does?

When a man (or a woman) enters the waters of baptism and receives the gift of the Holy Ghost, they are entitled to priesthood power from those gifts (repentance and revelation) based on their worthiness. In the temple, women are endowed with all the same gifts and powers as a man. There is not separate ceremony for men, there is no separate blessing. Both men and women have the same blessings given to them in the temple. These powers and blessings are also contingent on their worthiness.

So how do we get priesthood power? By our worthiness.

In a Mormon Channel episode, Sister Julie B. Beck said,

I think that there is a great confusion about this, and some of it came about through the sifting of the scriptures and when plain and precious things were removed from the scriptures, but there is confusion about priesthood and how we talk about it…sometimes [we imply] that the men who hold the priesthood are the priesthood… [but] the priesthood is the power of God… it is His power… and in His plan He has give certain responsibilities to men and to women to utilize that power he’s made available to bless His children. Some of that power comes to us through the gifts and blessings of the priesthood…some of that power comes to us through ordinances. For instance, when we are baptized and given the gift of the Holy Ghost. Everybody gets that power if they’re worthy… that is God’s power speaking to us through the power of revelation... There are authorizations to perform ordinances.

Sometimes we say “Well, the men have it and the women don’t.” I hear that argument a lot. That isn’t even the right question. The question we should be having in our lives is “How can I access every ordinance that’s available to me to walk back to my Heavenly Father. How can I access the gifts and the blessings he’s made available to every one of His children.” And those blessings and ordinances are not gender specific, those saving ordnances that will exalt us. Now, men have been given the assignment to hold in trust the priesthood. To really understand this you would have to do a study of the family of Abraham and go all the way back to Adam and “Why did the the Lord give Adam to give the Priesthood to hold in trust?” It was so that every child of Adam’s family would have access to the ordinances that would save them. That was Adam’s assignment. To hold in trust that authority to perform those ordinances to bless his family. Now Eve was his sealed wife. That was a priesthood ordinance that sealed them. So the power of that ordinance was effective in her life. She also had assignments in her family. To teach her children, to nurture her children, to create the life of that child. And by whose power does that happen? That is God’s power. Women don’t need to be ordained to an office to perform that… The Lord can bless us in many many ways through the gifts of the priesthood…

This is Satan's way of confusing all of us, so that the men don’t understand what they have and value it, and the women don’t understand what they have and value it, and that neither values what the other has. If we can get into a polarizing, combative frame of mind then neither of us values really what the Lord has blessed us with in His priesthood.

This polarizing, combative frame of mind is what I see all around in the discussion about women and the priesthood. Why? Because Satan wants to confuse us so that none of us can enjoy the blessings of the power of God. I wish that we could get beyond this frame of mind and open up a real dialogue about how women can use the power of the priesthood in their lives and to bless the lives of others (which, really, when we get right down to it is the purpose of the priesthood – to bless the lives of others).

Priesthood Organization and Authority

Women will (and do and have) absolutely perform(ed) priesthood ordinances. In the post at By Common Consent a commenter suggested that women perform ordinances in the temple for “practical” reasons. I do not think that is so.

In the most recent (April 2012) General Conference, Sister Julie B. Beck echoed President Spencer W. Kimball’s call for the sisters of the Church to “catch the vision of Relief Society.” In a BYU Devotional address earlier in 2012, Sister Beck said that the Relief Society is like a priesthood quorum. “A priesthood quorum is a group of men with the same office of priesthood who are to perform a special labor.” The prophet Joseph Smith
“organiz[ed] the women under the priesthood after the pattern of the priesthood.” The Relief Society, then, is a priesthood quorum for women. Sister Beck quoted a talk given by President Boyd K. Packer about quorums, stating that the words “quorum vos unum” mean “of whom we will that you be one”. She then said, “The word society has a meaning nearly identical to that of quorum. It connotes “an enduring and cooperating … group” distinguished by its commons aims and beliefs.”

Sister Beck went on to point out all the patterns of the priesthood that include women as well, such as the calling of Relief Society presidencies, sustaining our Relief Society leaders and teachers, receiving personal revelation over our stewardships, among other patterns.

When will we, as sisters of the Church, realize that our Relief Society is part of the priesthood? The Church was not fully organized until the Relief Society was formed in the pattern of the priesthood.

Equal Partners with Different Responsibilities

By divine design, men and women have different roles – both in the family and in the Church. This does not mean that we are not equal (different =/= unequal). It does not mean that men are somehow “over” women. “By divine design, [the brethren] are to preside over [the Church] in love and righteousness and are responsible to provide the necessities of life and protection for [the Church]. [The sisters of the Church] are primarily responsible for the nurture of [the members of the Church]. In these sacred responsibilities, [brethren and sisters] are obligated to help one another as equal partners.” (The Family: A Proclamation to the World – edited to apply to the Church broadly) If the purpose of the Church is to strengthen home and family then it makes sense that the Church is patterned after the family. The basic unit of the Church is not actually the ward, it is the family. So here we have it – men have different roles in the Church than women do. But, they “are obligated to help one another as equal partners.” So just as fathers are to preside in their families in love and righteousness, men are supposed to preside in the Church in love and righteousness.

Some questions to think about that may help this be more clear: Should men have wombs and carry children just as women do? Should Adam and Eve both simultaneously partaken of the fruit of the tree, rather than Even partaking first, then offering to Adam? Should there have been a male and a female Christ?

Could mortality be possible with out Eve (female)? Could immortality be possible without Christ (male)? Is one more significant than the other? Was Eve’s act any less noble, any less vital to our eternal salvation?

A Woman’s Right

It is a woman’s right to posses and exercise every power of the priesthood (based on her worthiness). The roles in exercising that power are different from men and women, but the power is the same. I do not feel any less significant in God’s plan for being a woman, nor do I feel that the doctrines (or policies) for the Church demean me as a woman. In fact, I feel that they empower me.

I feel like this is what Sister Beck has been trying to drill into our stubborn woman brains the past several years – that women have so much more potential than we even recognize. That women spend so much time worrying about why women aren’t ordained to priesthood offices they are wasting precious time they could be using to perform the priesthood duties they have already been given. Why are we sitting around arguing and complaining about why women “don’t have the priesthood” when we know and can be taught by the gospel of Jesus Christ and by His Holy Spirit that we indeed do have every blessing and power of the priesthood, that we, as women, are organized after the pattern of the priesthood? Why don’t we get up and go to work, exercising the priesthood power that is ours to exercise, doing good in God’s kingdom in the way we are called to?

Let us rise up and catch the vision of Relief Society and be the women God wants us to be.

Seasons of Womanhood

To every thing there is a season,
and a time to every purpose under the heaven:

A time to be born, and a time to die;
a time to plant, and a time to pluck up that which is planted;
A time to kill, and a time to heal;
a time to break down, and a time to build up;
A time to weep, and a time to laugh;
a time to mourn, and a time to dance;
A time to cast away stones, and a time to gather stones together;
a time to embrace, and a time to refrain from embracing;
A time to get, and a time to lose;
a time to keep, and a time to cast away;
A time to rend, and a time to sew;
a time to keep silence, and a time to speak;

Ecclesiastes 3:1-7

I was originally going to title this post "seasons of motherhood" but then I realized that since all women are (or at least can be) mothers, even if they do not bear their own children biologically, the title I chose is more descriptive of this post - especially because women experience more seasons than just the seasons of motherhood.

A friend of mine is staying with us with her two children (ages 3 years and 5 months) while her husband is out of the country. My husband is also back and forth, in the country, out of the country, for the next several months, which was part of the reason we offered our home to her and her kids - so that we can provide companionship for one another while our husbands are away. It's been working out really well - she and I are very similar, and we are both really easy going. We get to have a lot of great gospel discussions, and we talk constantly about raising our kids and our struggles as mothers.

Recently my friend was chatting with her husband online and she was telling him about all the things that I do - I am pretty involved in the community with my children and I get to do a lot of things for "me" as well. My kids are 5 and 3. After my friend finished telling her husband about all the things I do he asked, "What do you do all day?" When she related this story to me, at the time where she quoted her husband's question I said emphatically, "You take care of a baby - that is a full time job in an of itself. My kids are older, they can take care of themselves." And then I commented, "When I have another baby, I am going to have to scale back dramatically."

As I said it, the full weight of that statement seemed to fall on me. I am going to have to scale back dramatically. If you know me, you know that this is not easy for me. Probably the hardest part about motherhood for me is the newborn stage when I do almost nothing other than keeping up on the necessary laundry and dishes and nurse and nap and change diapers.

I will admit it, I am one of those peoples who thinks naps (in general) are a waste of time.

Image Credit: fdecomite

As I was thinking about how I would need to scale back when another baby comes, I was reminded of Stephanie at Diapers and Divinity who recently asked me to host her General Conference Book Club while she added another ball to her juggling act - she handed me one of her many balls so that she could keep juggling all the other balls - especially the most important ball: her family. I am grateful for her example.

Several years ago, when I was pregnant with my second child, I attended a Relief Society retreat in the mountains in Utah. Our key note speaker at the retreat was Janice Kapp Perry, a notable LDS songwriter who has written many of the most well-loved songs in the children's songbook (A Child's Prayer, I Love to See the Temple, I'm Trying to Be like Jesus, Love is Spoken Here, We'll Bring the World His Truth, as well as As Sisters in Zion from the LDS Hymnbook). Sister Perry talked to us about times in her life when she had small children, but felt disappointed because she didn't have the time to write music and perform music like she wanted to. Then she was reminded that there would be a time in her life, a season, for writing and performing music, but the season she was in at that moment was a season of motherhood to small children. When she realized that the season of having small children would not last forever, it was easier for her to enjoy that season.

I have tried to apply this principle in my own life - there are seasons for me to spend most of my time at home, cuddling a newborn, and there are seasons in my life when I can take my kids and show them the world (or at least our community). There are seasons in my life during which I will be making all sorts of new friends and meeting new people, and there are seasons in my life that will be spent enjoying old friends, and basking in the simplicity of life.

Just like the seasons of our earth - Spring, Summer, Fall, Winter - we may have our "favorite" season of our lives. My favorite season of the earth is Spring - when all the flowers are blooming and there are new things in my garden every day. I get out of the house almost every day, work in the yard, play outside with the kids, and just enjoy the earth. For me, this season would be the season of young children. They are so inquisitive and so eager to do things, and they are learning so much every day. We can be involved in many things in our community, learning new things and meeting new people nearly every day. We learn together about the world around us. I love basically everything about this time period, and the only thing that puts a damper on my mood is the occasional rainy day.

My least favorite season of the year is Summer. It is so hot it's almost unbearable. I end up staying inside too much and I get a little stir crazy. But my favorite part about summer is plunging into a nice cold swimming pool. For me, this would be like the newborn season of womanhood. Taking care of a newborn is really stressful, and like the heat of summer, it can be unbearable at times. I end up staying inside too much, and I get stir crazy. But my favorite part about taking care of a newborn is the rush I feel when a baby coos or smiles at me, or when my baby snuggles me. That is like that rush you get when you plunge into a cold pool, and the heat of the summer seems worth it, at least for a little while.

And my favorite seasons will probably change as I experience more seasons. I haven't yet experienced the season of teen children, or grown children, or grandchildren.

As I have been thinking about how my life will change when I have another baby, I have been preparing myself to enjoy that time when a baby comes, rather than lament the changes I will have to make in my lifestyle. The season I will be in will just be a different season - but there are beautiful things in every season. We just have to remember to look for them - and enjoy them.

How have you experienced seasons in your life? Have you struggled with some seasons more than others? What is your favorite season that you have experienced in your life? How do you adjust to new seasons?

Can I justify reading instead of doing the dishes?

You’ll have to listen to Sister Beck’s Q&A on the Mormon channel to get the answer.

My kids love reading. I love reading. Sister Beck loves reading.

If you have been struggling with knowing how to do “leisure time” I would really suggest listening to the Relief Society Mormon Channel episode 15 in the Q&A’s with Sister Beck.

Knowing what it even means to have “leisure time” has been a hard concept for me to figure out, so this episode has really been amazing.

I especially liked how she mentioned “chasing the trends” in reading rather than reading literature that will uplift and elevate us. She even talked about reading to increase her vocabulary. I love that “side effect” of reading good literature.

She also talks a lot about blogging and said that Abish would have been a blogger. It made me think about why I blog. I think that I blog for the right reasons. She also mentioned making sure we have the right tone on our blog. And the quote from President Benson reminded me of that post by Emily Matchar about how she can’t stop reading Mormon Mommy Blogs.

Now that I have told you enough about the episode, you know you can’t wait to listen to it. Here’s another snippet, but you’ll have to go to Mormon Channel to get the whole episode.

What Mormon Channel programs have you been enjoying?

True Science. True Religion.

I was reading over at Fred’s Spiritual Corner the other day about science and religion, and it got me thinking…

If I haven’t mentioned it before, I studied mathematics and physics at the university level. I obtained a bachelor’s degree in mathematics, and a minor in physics. I love math. I love physics. I am a lover of science, and a lover of religion.

I am not all that unusual. There are lots of Mormons (Latter-day Saints) who love science. In fact, President Ezra Taft Benson once said, “Religion and science have sometimes appeared in conflict. Yet, the conflict can only be apparent, not real, for science seeks truth, and true religion is truth. There can never be conflict between revealed religion and true science. Truth is truth, whether labeled science or religion. All truth is consistent.”

In 1973, President N. Eldon Tanner wrote, “The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints has always taught that the glory of God is intelligence and that a man can be saved no faster than he gains knowledge.” Not only are many members of the Church well educated and lovers of science, but the gospel even teaches us to be lovers of science.

(image credit: euthman)

President Tanner went on to say, “Scientists who acknowledge God as a personal God and who accept the scriptures as the word of God may enjoy all scientific principles and scholastic training and progress as rapidly and as far as any other scientist.” We do not need to disregard religion in order to understand science. Nor is it necessary to separate the two.

The Lord has taught us that we should teach each other and learn “words of wisdom” out of the best books (not necessarily just scripture) by study – but also by faith.

It’s important that we don’t disregard our faith while we are studying. The most influential principle in my course of study in physics and mathematics has been learning that “by the power of the Holy Ghost [I can] know the truth of all things.” (Moroni 10:5; emphasis added) Notice the quantifier used here – all. The lack of any other descriptive term in this promise gives us a clue that Moroni doesn’t mean “all spiritual things” or “all things pertaining to the gospel of Jesus Christ”, but truly that by the power of the Holy Ghost we can know the truth of all things – even “secular” things. I have also come to realize that what President Benson said is true  - that “truth is truth, whether labeled science or religion.” There can be no truth that is not religious, because all truth leads us to our Father in Heaven.

We also need to be careful that we do not neglect to prioritize our study of the gospel. Surely we are encouraged to gain a knowledge of the way things work in this world, but these will do us no good if we don’t have a deep understanding of the most important things – things like our relationship with God and Jesus Christ, and our responsibilities in the plan of salvation.

President Tanner concluded his article with this statement, “Anyone who, with an open mind and a prayerful heart, will give as much attention to the teachings of Jesus Christ as to scientific and academic studies will keep his faith.” And, I would add, their understanding of those scientific and academic things will be multiplied.

There has been a lot of debate in the public eye recently about religion and it is very interesting to see how those who are not religious accuse those who are religious of being close minded. But how are those who ridicule religion not being close minded themselves? President Tanner said of these people, “They say one should keep an open mind and learn all the truth one can, yet they close their minds when it comes to the subject of religion.” It is also interesting that those experts in fields of science should feel bold enough to comment on religion, when if a religious expert comments on science they are ridiculed and mocked. Just because I lack an understanding of the principles of chemistry or biology does not mean those principles are not true. Similarly, a lack of understanding of religion does not make religion false or any more preposterous than the principles of evolution.

(image credit: NASA Goddard Photo and Video)

It is interesting to observe how the “truths” of science have changed over time. As we discover “new” truths in science they frequently over turn other “truths” we thought we knew for sure. The whole method of science is that you can never prove something isn’t you can only prove that it is – or, in the absence of a convincing conclusion, you can say there isn’t enough evidence to prove that it is – but just because you can’t prove it is true doesn’t mean it isn’t true. Why would we not extend this method of thinking to religion? And yet people devote a lot of their time and energy to proving that God does not exist, or that one religion or another is not true when in fact, we should be simply dedicating our energies to finding out what is true.

The same scientific method that is used to prove countless scientific principles can be used with religion. The only difference is that the “measurement” can only be found in your own heart and soul. Only you can measure the results from your experiment (although the “fruits” of your experiments may be seen by others – Matt 7:20) President Harold B. Lee quoted Dr. Henry Eyring who said, “I have often met this question: ‘Dr. Eyring, as a scientist, how can you accept revealed religion?’ The answer is simple. The Gospel commits us only to the truth. The same pragmatic tests that apply in science apply to religion. Try it. Does it work?”

I testify that I have tried it. I have tried the gospel. I know that it works. I have also studied science. I know that many of the principles science has discovered are true. I believe that understanding the principles of science can bring us closer to God. I know that we can believe in true science and true religion – and indeed, that is our purpose as Latter-day Saints – to come to understand all truth.

How do you view science and religion? How did you decide that God is real? Did you experiment, just as you would have experimented on an scientific principle?

For more reading on knowledge, science, and religion, see these books/articles:

Find the Answers in the Scriptures – President Harold B. Lee, Dec 1972 First Presidency Message
Right Answers – President N. Eldon Tanner, Oct 1973 First Presidency Message
Your Charge: To Increase in Wisdom and Favor with God and Man – President Ezra Taft Benson, Sept 1979 New Era
Chapter 27: Learning by Study and by Faith – Brigham Young; Teachings of the Presidents of the Church 1997

The Importance of a Name

(find the talk here)

This talk inspired me to make this with Photoshop. I’m not great with Photoshop, but I think it turned out okay. I loved how Elder M. Russell Ballard dissected the name of the Church and talked about the significance of every part – even the seemingly insignificant article “The” at the beginning of the name.

 (please feel free to share this image, pin it, whatever – just make sure to give credit)

I was also somewhat pleased that Elder Ballard’s talk was kind of a follow-up and clarification of President Boyd K. Packer’s talk in April 2011 General Conference when he talked about how important it was to use the full and proper name of the Church and to refer to ourselves as “members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints” or simple “Latter-day Saints.” I know many people wondered what was going to happen to the Church’s “I’m a Mormon” campaign, so I am glad that Elder Ballard clarified that for now, it wasn’t going anywhere, but it’s purpose was to teach people who “Mormons” really are (members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints).

Elder Ballard said, “I have thought a lot about why the Savior gave the nine-word name to His restored Church. It may seem long, but if we think of it as a descriptive overview of what the Church is, it suddenly becomes wonderfully brief,candid, and straightforward.” I am sure many people wonder why the Lord decided to give His Church such a mouthful of a name, but, like Elder Ballard pointed out, it is wonderfully descriptive, and rather brief, when you look at all it really says (see image above).

“I am a member of the Church of Jesus Christ. Because we believe in the Book of Mormon, which is named after an ancient American prophet-leader and is another testament of Jesus Christ, we are sometimes called Mormons.” I hope that I get the opportunity to use this response to the question “Do you belong to the Mormon Church?” I believe this response can also be appropriate when asked the question “Are you Mormon?” It’s wonderfully succinct and hits all the important points, while validating the person’s question.

Elder Ballard said, “Surely it would be easier for [people] to understand that we believe in and follow the Savior if we referred to ourselves as members of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.” Just think of how the media coverage might be different today if we had spent the last 100+ years referring to ourselves as “members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints”? I do understand that when the Church was first organized it was important to distinguish us from other Christians – and that is still important. We don’t mind being “different” Christians – in fact, it’s the best part of our Church – we are not just another protestant religion. We belong to the restored Church of Jesus Christ.

“The Savior’s name is the only name under heaven by which man can be saved.”

“Do we realize how blessed we are to take upon us the name of God’s Beloved and Only Begotten Son? Do we understand how significant that is?” Do you refer to yourself as a member of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints? How do you tell people about the full name of the Church?

Come, Let Us Anew

I have started writing this post a few times in the past week… but things have been crazy, and I didn’t think I could just jump back into blogging without explaining my absence, or at least incorporating my reasons into a post.

Remember this talk by President Uchtdorf a few years ago? He talked about slowing down when life gets crazy and focusing on the most important things. I love this blog – I love studying the gospel in depth and writing about the things I am learning. However, over the Christmas holiday we had 10 extra people in our house (including 3 extra children) and most days there were between 2 and 4 extra dogs. We have a relatively roomy home, but with that many people it was all I could do to keep up with my own chores/family and spend time with my parents, brothers and sisters and their children and dogs.

So basically, the blog went on hold, and I spent some much needed quality time with my mom and dad and siblings. We haven’t all been together since my brother passed away last summer. And my other older brother was able to be sealed to his wife’s twins from her first marriage. It was a really great time, and I had to fight the urge to spend time blogging – it would have made me frustrated and stressed (as if there wasn’t enough stress from having so many people to cook for and clean up after.)

I had to remind myself to follow President Uchtdorf’s advice about slowing down through turbulence.

My dear brothers and sisters, we would do well to slow down a little, proceed at the optimum speed for our circumstances, focus on the significant, lift up our eyes, and truly see the things that matter most.

The optimum speed for my circumstances over Christmas and New Year were reading my Book of Mormon as much as I could (even though I didn’t end up finishing before the new year) and writing as often as possible in my journal, attending Church meetings, spending time with my family playing games and eating, and doing what chores I could afterwards.

My husband left for a TDY assignment last Monday, and the rest of my family left the next day, so after a full house for nearly two weeks, it’s now just me and the kids for a few weeks.

I am left musing over the new year and resolutions and the atonement and basically feeling a suddenly drop in pressure.

Basically, let me just sum up my thoughts about the New Year:

1.) the atonement is a daily-use principle, and allows us to make “resolutions” each day, as if it were a new year every day of the year
2.) I usually make long-term goals at General Conference time each year – April and October – so there’s my excuse for not making any New Year’s resolutions.
3.) my husband and I talked about having a family theme for each year (we never have before, but we think we should start). More about that when he gets back.

Looking back, I would say 2011 was “the best of times, and the worst of times” for me. Between 2010 and 2011… well, let’s just say life has not been what I expected it to be. That’s the thing about life and relationships. You don’t know what is in store, and you cannot predict the behavior of other people. Period. I am trying to learn how to live my life the right way, and it is hard. The Lord has counseled me to stay in close contact with Him so I can know His will for me, and I think that is going to be my personal theme this year.

This year, 2012, will be the year I figure out how to live my life the way Heavenly Father wants me to live it. Not the way I think I should live it, or the way I think He wants me to live it – rather, I will seek personal revelation and inspiration so that I can actually live my life the way He wants me to. So that every thought, word, and deed is what He wants for me.

So, “come, let us anew our journey pursue”!

Do you make New Year’s resolutions? Do you use the atonement daily? What are your thoughts on the new year?